Preview

Tripartite Theory of Knowledge

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1210 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Tripartite Theory of Knowledge
It’s arguably one of the greatest philosophical debates of all time; what does it mean to know? The Tripartite Theory is a model that tries to define individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions to know a proposition. Edmund Gettier wrote a three page paper that philosophers to this day are still trying to debunk. This essay investigates how Gettier shows that the Tripartite Theory of Knowledge fails, which then leads to a discussion whether the theory can ever be fixed. Although some philosophers have tried to simply reject the Gettier cases, his counter examples have a great deal of strength and proved he could provide situations in which we lack knowledge, despite all the criteria being met.
It is generally accepted that the three conditions for us to possess knowledge is justified, true, belief. The first condition is belief. We cannot know unless we believe, even if it is true and we have great reasons to think it is true, we will only know it if we believe it. The second condition is truth. No matter how justified a belief, or how long it is believed, it cannot constitute knowledge if it turns out false. The third condition is justification. Lucky guesses don’t count, we can only know if we have a really good reason to believe.
The Tripartite Theory states; subject (s) knows proposition (p) if and only if (i) p is true, (ii) s believes that p and (iii) s’s belief that p is justified.
So in order to have propositional knowledge it actually has to be true, we need to believe it is true and our reasons need to be justified.
For example, as I write this essay I (s) know that its 20degrees outside (p). First of all, it is true, it is 20 degrees outside (i). I believe it is true (ii) and I am justified in my belief because I can see the temperature gauge outside showing 20 degrees, the radio weather channel mentioned it is 20 degrees outside today and it just feels like 20 degrees outside to me (iii). Due to the Tripartite Theory,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    The first Area of Knowliedge I will consider is the one of Natural and Human Sciences. These are branches of human knowledge which are based upon the scientific method. Therefore, in Sciences knowledge is asserted (and dismissed) using concrete empirical evidence . Assuming that this is always the case, in theory the quote that I am analysing would therefore not have a…

    • 1551 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    With this lesson, we begin a new unit on epistemology, which is the philosophical study of knowledge claims. In this first lesson on epistemology, Dew and Foreman discuss some of the basic issues raised in the study of epistemology and then discuss the nature of knowledge itself. They consider questions such as, “What do we mean when we say we know something?” “What exactly is knowledge?…

    • 731 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Knowledge is not the same as belief. Beliefs can be mistaken, but no-one can know what is false.…

    • 1338 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Donovan Implications

    • 2251 Words
    • 10 Pages

    We laugh about the person who says, ‘I know I’m right; don’t confuse me with arguments’. And yet there are times when we find ourselves wanting to say that too. For there are situations in which we feel sure that we know something, even though if asked to give a good argument to back up our claim we are at a loss to know quite how to do so. ‘I know you’re the person I spoke to on the bus yesterday.’ ‘I know I have two hands.’ ‘I know it is wrong to let that child starve.’ ‘I know that six minus four leaves two.’ Our experience of being confident that we are right in cases like those is often called intuition. Intuitive knowing seems to be a direct, convincing way of knowing, which needs no further argument. And it is a perfectly ordinary, everyday occurrence as those examples show.…

    • 2251 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Things that constitute Matters of Fact can be rejected without that rejection resulting in a contradiction. In short, these objects of human reason are not certain and can not be derived from logically or rationally reflecting on a concept. With this being said, Matters of Fact can be understood to be those things that are a posteriori, which means knowledge or justifications that can is dependent upon experience or empirical evidence. An example of a Matter of Fact is the statement that Earth is the third planet from the sun. One can not know this fact by simply reflecting on Earth and the solar system. There is nothing about the Earth or the solar system that is contingent upon the Earth to be the third plant from the sun. As a result, no one can know that the Earth is the third planet from the sun without viewing with a telescope that this happening is the case. Another example of this is the statement that it is raining outside. One can not simply reflect on the concept of rain to conclude that it is raining outside. Hence, in order to know that it is raining outside one has to go to the door or window to observe that it is raining outside. In addition to this, if someone where to reject the fact that it is raining outside, that rejection has an equal ability of being true or false upon that person’s observation of it raining outside. Though…

    • 1897 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ex; What is knowledge? Can we know anything for certain? What are the limitations of what we know?…

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Summary of Edmund Gettier

    • 437 Words
    • 2 Pages

    According to Plato’s theory that knowledge is justified true belief, in order to know that a given proposition is true, one must not only believe the relevant true proposition, but one must also have a good reason for doing so. In his paper, Edmund Gettier argued that there are situations in which one's belief may be justified and true, yet fail to count as knowledge. He presented two examples to show that it is possible for a person to be justified in believing something that is thought to be true, but is not true because of the reasons they thought. Gettier claimed that it was possible to have "justified true belief" about something and yet it would not be considered knowledge. In other words, justified true belief might be necessary for knowledge, but it is not sufficient for claiming that one really has knowledge on a certain subject. By providing counterexamples Gettier is able to illustrate where a person can have a justified true belief that is not knowledge.…

    • 437 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As you work your way through the decision making process, or another activities that are aided by using critical thinking, it is important to recognize and challenge your inferences and assumptions. However, it is difficult to do that if you do not know the difference between an inference and an assumption. With a solid foundation, you can better challenge your assumptions and question your inferences.…

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato, (1989). Plato’s Theory of Knowledge.…

    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Ladder of Inference

    • 1104 Words
    • 5 Pages

    t is vital in any group and/or organization to establish and maintain a reliable exchange of valid and verifiable information about important problems and issues. This requires the ability to discriminate among four types of information: description, inference, attribution, and evaluation. A description is a (hopefully objective and reasonably accurate) report or account of an experience or observation. An inference is a conclusion derived from beliefs or what are thought to be facts. An attribution is an ascribed, inferred, or assumed cause, characteristic, or motive of another person. An evaluation is a determination or judgement about the value or "goodness" of a statement or action by another person. The Ladder of Inference Model is a very useful tool for helping individuals become more aware of and discriminate among these four very different types of information and their use in communication.…

    • 1104 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Truth Definition Essay

    • 482 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Let’s take the example of history. Is everything we read about fact? How much of what we read in our History textbooks is actually the author’s perception of the truth. Let’s take the example of various…

    • 482 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Theories of Human Nature

    • 768 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The first of the five theories is rationality, and simply states that one uses knowledge with the process of thought to draw a conclusion. If a dog’s bowl full of food in the morning, but later in the afternoon it has become empty. One could rationally draw the conclusion that the dog could have eaten all the food out of the bowl.…

    • 768 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Edmond Gettier is considered to be one of, if not the most important philosopher of 20th Century philosophy. Gettier's argument against the traditional account of knowledge, aka "The Gettier Problem", is knowledge defined as justified true belief. The idea of justified true belief declares that in order for a given proposition to be true, one must believe more than the relevant true proposition, but also to have justification for doing so. Gettier argues that the traditional conditions for knowledge in the JTB (justified true belief) model are not sufficient. In other words, in some cases, meeting the 3 conditions, which are truth, belief and justification, are not enough to count something as knowledge. Gettier cases are counter-examples to the JTB model and they work against the account of knowledge. In order to validate his argument and challenge, Gettier refuted the original definition of knowledge while also sparking pronounced epistemological energy and innovation.…

    • 574 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Although distinctions similar to Kant’s a priori–a posteriori distinction and his synthetic–analytic distinction have been made by thinkers such as Hume and Leibniz, Kant is the first to apply two such distinctions to generate a third category for knowledge. Hume, for instance, does not distinguish between what Kant calls the analytic and the a priori and what he calls the synthetic and the a posteriori, so that, for Hume, all synthetic judgments are necessarily a posteriori. Since only a priori truths have the important qualities of being universal and necessary, all general truths about reality—as opposed to particular observations about unconnected events—must be a priori. If our a priori knowledge is limited to definitional analytic judgments, then Hume is right in concluding that rationally justified knowledge of universal and necessary truths is impossible. Kant’s coup comes in determining that synthetic judgments can also be a priori. He shows that mathematics and scientific principles are neither analytic nor a posteriori, and he provides an explanation for the category of the synthetic a priori by arguing that our mental faculties shape our…

    • 944 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Geometry module 1.01

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Theorem- information that seem true but must be proven (like solving a mystery) using the postulates.…

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays

Related Topics